Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-20 Thread Bence Damokos
Dear Community Members, The Affiliations Committee has put together a public response to the Board's decision to express the dissatisfaction with the process and outcome of the decision, and thereby the opportunity lost to actually discuss and address the Board's underlying concerns. This

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-13 Thread Gregory Varnum
Phoebe, I appreciate you sharing this information - it fills in a few gaps. I am still concerned that there was not more opportunity for input prior to the decision - and that everyone was clearly not on the same page about what was going to be discussed exactly. Regarding your earlier comments

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-13 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Mark, 13/02/2014 00:58: In other projects this doesn't seem to be as big of a deal. I'm a heavy participant in OpenStreetMap, which is an organization legally based in the UK. That's a country I have no connection to at all. But it doesn't really matter, because the OSM Foundation does things I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-13 Thread phoebe ayers
Hi Greg! A few fast notes before I go to bed :) On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.comwrote: Phoebe, I appreciate you sharing this information - it fills in a few gaps. I am still concerned that there was not more opportunity for input prior to the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-13 Thread Gregory Varnum
Quick follow-up question and comment - Is there any reason for affiliates to feel they should now at least plan for possible caps on other areas? Does that absolutely seem unlikely (granted anything is possible) or not really something the board can comment on more firmly - which I suspect will

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-13 Thread Michael Peel
On 11 Feb 2014, at 20:18, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Frédéric, a quick comment: On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:44 AM, Frédéric Schütz sch...@mathgen.ch wrote: Your decision is not you should have a good track record, it is you should have a good track record AND NOT have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-12 Thread Risker
I think perhaps this financial benefit discussion has taken us a bit off track. This thread has a wealth of well-informed commentary, the majority of it coming from volunteers; for most, any financial benefit is the result of expenses being (partially) covered to carry out these volunteer

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-12 Thread Mathias Damour
Le 12/02/2014 03:14, Mark a écrit : On 2/11/14, 9:18 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: The WMF also wants to let all groups have easier access to trademarks and funds. This is what user groups were designed to allow, with minimal overhead. These two ideas were combined into be a user group for two

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-12 Thread Mark
On 2/12/14, 10:55 PM, Mathias Damour wrote: I like that initiatives such as the individual-engagement grants, user-group recognition, etc. are opening up more avenues for Wikimedian organizations, organized along different lines, to find a more recognized (and funded) role in the movement. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-12 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Yes, people employed by the WMF working from outside the USA exis. They are very much part of what WMF does and, there is no trickle back to the local countries really. They are part of the WMF structure and their priorities are the WMF priorities. There is a huge potential outside the USA

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread phoebe ayers
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:46 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.comwrote: On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:30 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote: pheobe, concerning your motion to vote saying: wikimedia foundation grows, the affiliated organisations do not grow the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Itzik Edri
What I can say about this new-old not surprising decision? When WMDE posted their feedback about the FDC, the responses from the board/fdc was wait, we want to finish 2 years cycle and then talk about the it. Of course it didn't stopped the WMF, before having such a discussion, to decide and limit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
phoebe ayers, 11/02/2014 06:33: The Board also decided that new organizations should first form as a user group and have two years of programmatic experience before being approved as a legally incorporated entity (either a chapter or thematic organization). A very unfortunate slowdown. What a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Anders Wennersten
Itzik Edri skrev 2014-02-11 09:26: makes the FDC kind of powerless, having to face him over the next 2 year with a really hard decisions about really limiting the allocation for the chapters, without of course, having enough time, knowledge or resources for them to prepare for self

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Frédéric Schütz
On 11/02/14 09:03, phoebe ayers wrote: Hi Phoebe, thanks for your answer ! It is indeed up to the WMF to decide the conditions a group must have achieved before being recognized as a chapter or thematic organization. However, this is an assessment at a given point in time. How the group

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Jan-Bart de Vreede
Dear Frederic, On 11 Feb 2014, at 10:44, Frédéric Schütz sch...@mathgen.ch wrote: On 11/02/14 09:03, phoebe ayers wrote: Hi Phoebe, thanks for your answer ! It is indeed up to the WMF to decide the conditions a group must have achieved before being recognized as a chapter or thematic

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Cynthia Ashley-Nelson
Consensus indicates that the implementation of this decision will greatly hinder the work of affiliates.It may help to disclose the initial problem statement presented to the Board, which resulted in the establishment of these new guidelines.What resolution is the Board seeking to achieve? In the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Risker
Not to be nit-picky, but what consensus would that be, Cynthia? The board's consensus is reflected in the decision. There's almost no public discussion of this outside of this specific thread on a mailing list (a grand total of two comments on the talk page of the FAQ, as I write), so I'm not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Cynthia Ashley-Nelson
Yes, I agree that the consensus of the Board is clear. I'm referring to the current consensus of the community, i.e., the feedback being received about this decision. Cynthia On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Not to be nit-picky, but what consensus would that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Gregory Varnum
While AffCom will likely be making an official statement later, I am having a hard time not chiming in and I do think it is worth pointing out that AffCom was not consulted in a manner I think most of us would have imagined occurring. I have noticed it mentioned a few times that our feedback was

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Samuel Klein
Hello Frédéric, a quick comment: On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 4:44 AM, Frédéric Schütz sch...@mathgen.ch wrote: Your decision is not you should have a good track record, it is you should have a good track record AND NOT have bylaws. Bylaws are fine, whatever makes sense for each group; just not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Nicole Ebber
Dear members of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, dear Wikimedians, I would like to share a few thoughts and questions with you. Thoughts and questions that I would love to see being addressed when talking about these movement issues. I have the feeling that this substantial decision is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Gregory Varnum
One of the (many) problems that I have with this is that it both makes these user groups more dependent on movement funds for a longer period of time, but then caps those funds in the same decision. It is easy to tell the org to just find some outside funding (which is mentioned in the FAQ) -

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread phoebe ayers
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:43 PM, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.comwrote: One of the (many) problems that I have with this is that it both makes these user groups more dependent on movement funds for a longer period of time, but then caps those funds in the same decision. One quick

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Cristian Consonni
2014-02-11 19:22 GMT+01:00 Cynthia Ashley-Nelson cindam...@gmail.com: Yes, I agree that the consensus of the Board is clear. IMHO, I wouldn't say that for two decisions taken with 7-3 and 6-4[1], when you can see that most of the times[2] the vote was unanimous. Cristian [1]

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Risker
Consensus is not the same as unanimity, and anyone who's crossed a few different Wikimedia projects will know that what is defined as consensus varies pretty widely, from majority +1 to 80% or higher support. For the purposes of board votes, it's majority +1. I'm actually quite pleased that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Bence Damokos
Speaking in my personal capacity, I echo the surprise that the Board has decided to move a motion before they had full or close to full consensus on the issue - which is in general a departure from the usual. I can only assume that there was a better reason behind the urgency than the need to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread phoebe ayers
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.comwrote: While AffCom will likely be making an official statement later, I am having a hard time not chiming in and I do think it is worth pointing out that AffCom was not consulted in a manner I think most of us would have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Cristian Consonni
2014-02-11 23:01 GMT+01:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: Consensus is not the same as unanimity, and anyone who's crossed a few different Wikimedia projects will know that what is defined as consensus varies pretty widely, from majority +1 to 80% or higher support. For the purposes of board

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Nathan
Hi Greg and all, This is not a direct reply to your points, but I think it might be helpful in removing the cloak of mystery from all this. Here is what happened during the board meeting, from my perspective.* Background context: * The board has been discussing movement roles for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Delphine Ménard
Le 12 févr. 2014 00:10, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com a écrit : For me in these debates about funding, which often present the staff on one side pushing to reduce the relative power and centrality of chapters on one side and chapter representatives pushing the opposite way on the other side,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Mark
On 2/11/14, 9:18 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: The WMF also wants to let all groups have easier access to trademarks and funds. This is what user groups were designed to allow, with minimal overhead. These two ideas were combined into be a user group for two years. This part I do think is a good

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.comwrote: Le 12 févr. 2014 00:10, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com a écrit : Well, it's actually pretty straightforward. For members of the Board of Trustees, FDC and AffCom, as well as Board members of all Chapters. All of us are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Nathan
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps you misunderstood what I was wondering about, which is probably my fault as I was trying to avoid giving any specific examples. But without at all attempting to disparage her or suggest that her intentions are anything

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-11 Thread Delphine Ménard
Le 12 févr. 2014 04:20, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com a écrit : On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:55 PM, Delphine Ménard notafi...@gmail.com wrote: Le 12 févr. 2014 00:10, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com a écrit : Well, it's actually pretty straightforward. For members of the Board of Trustees, FDC and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread rupert THURNER
pheobe, concerning your motion to vote saying: wikimedia foundation grows, the affiliated organisations do not grow the affiliated organisations are recommended to seek other funding (which the foundation did try and did not succeed very well) i am disappointed personally by you. you as a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread MZMcBride
phoebe ayers wrote: The decisions are published in the meeting minutes here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2013-11-24#Movement_roles There is also a FAQ on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles_FAQ Thanks for putting this together. I made a few tweaks to the FAQ; it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread Oliver Keyes
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:30 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote: pheobe, concerning your motion to vote saying: wikimedia foundation grows, the affiliated organisations do not grow the affiliated organisations are recommended to seek other funding (which the foundation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread MZMcBride
rupert THURNER wrote: i am disappointed personally by you. you as a person, you as an american, and you as a board member of the foundation. What about Phoebe as a woman? Or Phoebe as a librarian? Or as a brassratgirl? Horrors. Your unnecessary hyperbole aside, I see Phoebe's role as a Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread Oliver Keyes
I think there needs to a basic rule of if you can get Max and I to disagree with you for the same reasons, you're probably in the wrong ;p On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:20 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: rupert THURNER wrote: i am disappointed personally by you. you as a person, you as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread Frédéric Schütz
On 11/02/14 06:33, phoebe ayers wrote: I want to draw your attention to two Wikimedia Board of Trustees decisions that were recently published, regarding funds allocated to the FDC/Annual plan grant process and Board approval of chapter/thematic organization status. In a nutshell, the Board

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board decisions on movement funding and approval issues

2014-02-10 Thread phoebe ayers
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:30 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote: pheobe, concerning your motion to vote saying: wikimedia foundation grows, the affiliated organisations do not grow the affiliated organisations are recommended to seek other funding (which the foundation